Backcourt?

[Fathertime]

Had a debate with other officials. We all agree that on an inbounds pass from A1, A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and land in the backcourt without having a backcourt violation occur.

The debate is whether A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and while still in the air, pass the ball to A3 who is standing in the backcourt. In this case, A2 is the first to legally touch the ball on the inbounds pass. 9.9.3 covers the rule. The casebook says this exeption is only for the player that makes the initial touch on the ball. The confusing thing in the casebook is it deals with a touch by B1 in the frontcourt prior to A2 touching it.

Help us clear this situation up. Thanks.

[Rufus]

I believe the case play is illustrative only (i.e., here's one example of how the 9.9.3 exemption works) rather than exclusionary for any instance outside that in the casebook play.

The throw in ends when the passed ball touches or is touched by another player inbounds (A2 in your example), when the passed ball touches or is touched by another player out of bounds except as in 7.5.7, or the throw-in team commits a throw-in violation.

The throw-in in your example ended when A2 touched the ball in the air. The exemption in 9.9.3 ended at the same time. The only player the exemption could apply to is A2 therefore, if he passes the ball to A3 in A's backcourt, I think that would be a violation.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Fathertime

Had a debate with other officials. We all agree that on an inbounds pass from A1, A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and land in the backcourt without having a backcourt violation occur.

The debate is whether A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and while still in the air, pass the ball to A3 who is standing in the backcourt. In this case, A2 is the first to legally touch the ball on the inbounds pass. 9.9.3 covers the rule. The casebook says this exeption is only for the player that makes the initial touch on the ball. The confusing thing in the casebook is it deals with a touch by B1 in the frontcourt prior to A2 touching it.

Help us clear this situation up. Thanks.

Violation.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Rufus

I believe the case play is illustrative only (i.e., here's one example of how the 9.9.3 exemption works) rather than exclusionary for any instance outside that in the casebook play.

The throw in ends when the passed ball touches or is touched by another player inbounds (A2 in your example), when the passed ball touches or is touched by another player out of bounds except as in 7.5.7, or the throw-in team commits a throw-in violation.

The throw-in in your example ended when A2 touched the ball in the air. The exemption in 9.9.3 ended at the same time. The only player the exemption could apply to is A2 therefore, if he passes the ball to A3 in A's backcourt, I think that would be a violation.

You are correct.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Fathertime

Had a debate with other officials. We all agree that on an inbounds pass from A1, A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and land in the backcourt without having a backcourt violation occur.

The debate is whether A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and while still in the air, pass the ball to A3 who is standing in the backcourt. In this case, A2 is the first to legally touch the ball on the inbounds pass. 9.9.3 covers the rule. The casebook says this exeption is only for the player that makes the initial touch on the ball. The confusing thing in the casebook is it deals with a touch by B1 in the frontcourt prior to A2 touching it.

Help us clear this situation up. Thanks.

The rule only allows the player who catches the ball to jump from FC and land in BC.

When A2 caught the ball, he had FC status, he established team control with the catch and ended the throw-in. When A3 touches the ball in the BC, violation.

[Camron Rust]

While the above posters are all correct, I philosophically don't like the ruling in this case. Of course, I call it like it is...but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

I'm of the opinion that player location (FC vs BC) should only established based on where a player actually is when they or a teammate initially obtains team control of the ball (on a throwin or steal)...and if in they are in the air, not until they land. As a result, the above play would not be a violation since the player in the air would have neither a frontcourt nor a backcourt location and could legally pass the ball to any player on their team.

Why you may ask? It just seems like a violation that penalizes something that isn't unfair to the other team.

For example, A1, on a throwin, passes the ball to an airborne A2, having jumped from A's frontcourt. B1 slightly tips the throwin pass just as A1 releases it. A2 catches the ball and lands in A's backcourt. By the current rules, this is a violation. But, there is no logicial nor equity/fairness argument why this should be a violation. It simply stops the game with a whistle...just because.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Fathertime

On an inbounds pass from A1, A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and land in the backcourt without having a backcourt violation occur. Is A2 is allowed to jump from the frontcourt, catch the ball, and while still in the air, pass the ball to A3 who is standing in the backcourt.

It's a violation. I know that this is either a casebook play, annual interpretation, or a recent IAABO Refresher Test question, but I can't find it. Looked twice. Can anyone out there help me?

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's a violation. I know that this is either a casebook play, annual interpretation, or a recent IAABO Refresher Test question, but I can't find it. Looked twice. Can anyone out there help me?

Billy
It's 9.9.1 in the casebook, Situation D.

[mbyron]

9.9.1 SITUATION D: Team A is awarded a throw-in near the division line. A1's
throw-in is deflected by B1; A2 jumps from Team A’s frontcourt, catches the ball
in the air and lands in the backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. The
throw-in ends when it is legally touched by B1. A2 gains player and team control in
the air after having left the floor from Team A’s frontcourt, therefore having frontcourt
status. As soon as A2 lands in the backcourt, he/she has committed a back-
court violation. The exception granted during a throw-in ends when the throw-in
ends and is only for the player making the initial touch on the ball. (9-9-3)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rufus

It's 9.9.1 in the casebook, Situation D.

Thanks, but I was actually looking for a citation where the player catching the throwin pass while in a midair jump from frontcourt to backcourt (backcourt rule exception) makes a second pass to a teammate who is already in the backcourt. In the citation I'm thinking of there is no complicating deflection by a defensive player. Still looking for that one. Help, please.

[CoachP]

I agree with Cameron. And there is no violation if airborne A2 tips the ball to A3 in the backcourt....

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by CoachP

I agree with Cameron. And there is no violation if airborne A2 tips the ball to A3 in the backcourt....

If you're talking about a throw-in where A2 is the first to legally touch the ball in bounds and is airborne after jumping from the frontcourt and taps to A3 in the backcourt, then yes, it is a violation.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CoachP

I agree with Cameron. And there is no violation if airborne A2 tips the ball to A3 in the backcourt....

Originally Posted by zm1283

If you're talking about a throw-in where A2 is the first to legally touch the ball in bounds and is airborne after jumping from the frontcourt and taps to A3 in the backcourt, then yes, it is a violation.

That depends on how you define "tips" or "taps".

If it was a "catch and throw", then TC was established, so it's a violation. If it was a "deflection" (or "batting the ball away from other players")then TC wasn't established, so the play is legal.

(Or, if you would grant A's request for a TO at exactly the time A2 tipped / tapped the ball, then it's a violation; otherwise it's not.)

[rsl]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm of the opinion that player location (FC vs BC) should only established based on where a player actually is ...

Isn't it one of our key principles that the status of a player in the air is where they last touched?

What if the player was jumping in from out of bounds?

"You are where you were until you get where you are going."

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

That depends on how you define "tips" or "taps".

If it was a "catch and throw", then TC was established, so it's a violation. If it was a "deflection" (or "batting the ball away from other players")then TC wasn't established, so the play is legal.

(Or, if you would grant A's request for a TO at exactly the time A2 tipped / tapped the ball, then it's a violation; otherwise it's not.)

You're right. I didn't read carefully enough about the "tipped" part. I'm thinking of the OP and the case book play where A2 catches and throws to teammate A3 who is standing in the BC.